[Harry Lavo]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"avidlistener" wrote in message
ps.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
"avidlistener" wrote in
message
oups.com

Getting the most accurate reproduction possible,
through equipment that measures properly, connected
to speakers that add as little distortion as
possible, (and face it this is where most distortion
is generated) in a properly set up room,

OR

Simply picking out equipment that gives you what you
believe the music should sound like according to your
own criteria, preference, biases, and emotions?

Why would these necessarily be in conflict?

There is no right answer, since the end goal is to
make the listener happy when playing one's favorite
recordings.

Oh, a rhetorical post.

They don't have to be, they just seem to be quite often.

Mostly in people's minds.

There seems to be two groups of audiophiles, one devoted
to measured accuracy and one that doesn't care about
measured performance, only about an emotional
connection.

For the vast majority of people, there is a fairly
strong connection between the two.

As I said, both are perfectly good reasons for choosing
equipment, and probably the lines cross very often.

There's considerable evidence that poor measured
performance = bad sound that almost nobody likes.

Fairly strong statements, Arny, presented as facts, not
opinions. Your supporting evidence?

Supporting evidence:

(1) SE triodes abandoned by the mainstream audio world.
(2) Tubes abandoned by the mainstream audio world.
(3) LP format abandoned by the mainstream audio world.
(4) Analog tape abandoned by the mainstream audio world.

(1) SE triodes never were part of the mainsteam audio world, at least as we
have know it since "hi-fi" came into being in the '50's.
(2) Tubes were abandoned, and then "rediscovered" by hi-fi lovers *because*
they sound better than SS to many "hi-fi" lovers. They now account for a
sizeable chunk of the "hi-fi lovers" market. As opposed to the mass market
where convenience and not sound quality holds sway. You can't prefer "more
accurate" sound quality if you don't even pay attention to sound quality,
wouldn't you agree, Arny?
(3) LP abandoned because most people took abysmal care of their LPs, hated
the resulting noise, and abandoned them for the "easy path" of CD.
Convenience and freedom from care, more than sound quality, Arny.
(4) Analog tape other than cassettes (in other words, where *sound quality*
was king, never was part of the mainstream audio world, Arny.) And
cassettes were again superceded by the CD because they were more convenient,
Arny. Most users were perfectly happy with the sound of cassettes....and
would be today if they came in the form of indestructable little disks.